cant say i disagree
i've argued for harsher punishments for economic cheaters previously.

 

i agree with this post 100% the staff are to lenient on certain situations

 

Staff cannot assume that a person uses all the features on a hacked client, uses multiple clients, or uses something as specific as x-ray. That looks extremely bad, is jumping the gun, and will cause unneeded, unwarranted, and unfair punishments. Assuming is never a good thing when it comes to anything related to punishment - in most games, and in real life.

Staff require as many facts as they can get to give a punishment. So, in the case of only seeing a user having a hacked client, they can only give the punishment for that - not for something like x-ray, fast break, etc.

 

this Modus Operandi leaves the door wide open for people to use all kinds of economic exploits until they get caught for each and every one.
I think a much more exhaustive process should be used to determine whether or not a previously convicted econ-sploiter has in fact removed everything and more important KEEPS it removed.
Probationary period
random spot checks with time stamped screen shots
etc.

you break the rules once, i think its highly likely you will do it again.

 

I'm all for a probationary period type of thing, but it could become a lot of work for Staff (not at first, but later on down the road), assuming your last statement is true: Break a rule once, break a rule again.

In the very least, whenever someone is caught having a hacked client, some basic checks should be done during their tempban: Suspicious flags for anything, recent balance and money exchanges, past bans and complaints, and so on. Assuming they look otherwise alright, let the tempban go as normal, and just keep a note of the person for future reference.

 

The main issue is that x-ray is a 'permban/appeal to andrew', but fast break is only a short temp-ban. I don't understand the big difference in punishments for these two mods.

I think fast break could actually hurt the economy more than xray could. I bet insta-breaking melons makes more $$/hour than xray mining.

 

I totally agree. 1+

 

Trust me I knew someone who used fastbreak.... They made tons of money. Won't tell anymore information about this player..

 

Part of the reason I left. People get weak punishment..... +1

Sent from my HTC One

 

yes please
anyone want to defender the cheaters?
Mendiboi cuz i <3 you even tho we disagree

 

I totally agree with this. People are not getting as harsh of a punishment as people should be getting (I argued this many months ago saying that donators should be equally punished like non-donators). However, Moo really brings up a good point - we still don't know who uses what.

In my opinion, if a mod has clear evidence to point that a user is FOR SURE using XRay, harsher punishments should be put in place. +1

 

In the case of having harsher punishments (overall or for a few things), I agree. However, any time Andrew/Staff has changed punishments to be harsher, the userbase complains and rebels. It's hard to change things like punishments without upsetting everyone...even if it does seem logical to change them. :/

 

rebels?
like.. whahuh?

So you don't punish justly out of fear of retribution from the lawbreakers?

That makes zero sense

 

I agree hacking clients are a danger to economy servers and punish should be perm

 

I don't support permanent bans, however I believe that using a game modification maliciously is a serious offense that demands repercussions. I also subscribe to the idea that everyone can change and become positive members of our community. So, I'm proposing that instead of arguing for something rash, like uncompromising permanent bans, we should instead discuss more rational punishments that do not expel individuals from our community. I would like to see cheaters write apologies to the community and undergo a probation-like period where their transactions are monitored or inhibited, all after a reasonable temp ban. The goal of a justice system should not focus exclusively on penalty, but rather it should seek to rehabilitate the perpetrator. I abhor the practice of senseless punishment for punishment's sake.

Additionally, I recognize that some of these individuals may not wish to become positive members of the community and are instead bent on continuous malicious behavior. In these cases, I support banishment until the banned person makes a very convincing attempt to demonstrate remorse, willingness to change, and affinity for the community. If the person is demonstrating these qualities, I believe we, as a community, must extend the benefit of doubt and allow them yet another chance. If the person truly does not want to play on our great server, then I highly doubt they would go through all the trouble of fooling us into believing they want to come back just so they could get another chance to act maliciously. If such a case were to happen, then I would sadly have to support extreme skepticism and ultimately a near-permanent ban. I just doubt we will ever see a circumstance similar to the one I've outlined.

I'm interested in your responses and criticism,

Mendi